hyderabad revised case study - fao - idrc - project … · of this project report. ... the andhra...

URBAN AND PERI URBAN AGRICULTURE: TOWARDS BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF LOW INCOME PRODUCER ORGANIZATIONS

HYDERABAD – CITY CASE STUDY

G V Krishnagopala and R. W. Simmonsb

aAccess Livelihoods Consulting India Private Limited H.No 12-5-149/14/9/1, Creative Satya Nivas, Flat No 304 Vijayapuri Colony, Tarnaka, Secunderbad-500017 bInternational Water Management Institute (IWMI), South Asia Regional Office, c/o ICRISAT Patencheru, A.P., India

URBAN AND PERI URBAN AGRICULTURE: TOWARDS BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF LOW INCOME PRODUCERS’ ORGANIZATIONS: HYDERABAD – CITY CASE STUDY IWMI-ALCI

II

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to acknowledge the inputs to the report that were generated by the DGIS/IDRC funded RUAF-CFF (Cities Farming for the Future) Project www.ruaf.org and the BMZ funded project entitled “Ensuring Health and Food Safety from Rapidly Expanding Wastewater Irrigation in South Asia” www.iwmi.org. In addition the authors would like to acknowledge the inputs to the project methodology provided by Dr. Deepa Joshi of IWMI-South Asia Office and to the FAO Project Focal Point Ms. Clarissa Ruggieri and Dr. Hubert de Bon of CIRAD for their comments during the finalization of this project report. We would also like to acknowledge the administrative support staff of Access Livelihoods Consulting India Private Limited and IWMI- South Asia Office.


III

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS V

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS V

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY VI

INTRODUCTION VII

CHAPTER 1. CONTEXT ANALYSIS

1.1 Andhra Pradesh and Hyderabad 1

1.2 Urbanization process 1

CHAPTER 2. URBAN AND PERI-URBAN AGRICULTURE (UPA) PROFILE

2.1 Historical development and status of UPA and Producers’ Organizations in the city of Hyderabad

2

2.1.1 Horticultural production in Andhra Pradesh and the expansion of informal perishable vegetable production in Peri-Urban Hyderabad.

3

2.1.2 Dairy production in Hyderabad: Green fodder producers and informal urban dairy units.

4

2.2 Organization of the urban/peri-urban green fodder production and marketing system, stakeholder analysis and linkages with urban dairy producers.

5

2.2.1 Attapur, Hyderabad. 5

2.2.2 Uppal District, Hyderabad 6

2.3 The organization of the vegetable and fodder chain 7

2.3.1 Vegetables 7

2.3.2 Fodder 8

2.4 Constraint affecting low-income producer groups (Rapid diagnostic technique) 9

CHAPTER 3. INSTITUTIONAL PROFILE

3.1 Key institutions operating in HUA: Potential role in supporting or constraining UPA related activities

10

3.1.1 Hyderabad Urban Development Authority (HUDA) 11

3.1.2 Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad MCH 12

3.1.3 Hyderabad Municipal Water Supply and Sanitation Board (HMWSSB) 12

3.1.4 Department of Agriculture (DOA) 12

3.1.5 Department of Horticulture (DOH) 12

3.1.6 Department of Animal Husbandry Dairying and Fisheries (DADF) 13

3.2 Policies and legal aspects concerning UPA and Producer Organizations 13

3.3 Overview of UPA innovations in the city 15

Chapter 4. Organization Profile: Producers’ Collective

4.1 Context of Origin 16

4.2 Brief Historical Description 17

4.2.1 Collective Activity by Paragrass Producers 17

4.2.2 Producer Organization Profile 18

CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Long-term trends in UPA in Hyderabad 20

5.1.1 Supportive Policies 20

5.1.2 Access to Credit 21

5.1.3 Access to water resources 21

5.1.4 Marketing 23

5.2 Conclusions and lessons learned 23

5.3 Recommendations 24

References 26


IV

ANNEX 1. IMAGES 27

Figure 1. IRS PAN (Merged) Satellite Image (2002) indicating MCH, HUDA and Municipal Boundaries.

27

Figure 2. Peerzadiguda vegetable plots (2002) 28

Figure 3. Peerzadiguda vegetable plots (2006) 29

Figure 4. Fodder (Paragrass) cultivation in Attapur, Hyderabad (2006) 30

Photographs of fodder production, harvesting, transporting, marketing in Hyderabad 31

ANNEX 2. AREA, POPULATION AND GROWTH OF HYDERABAD URBAN AGGLOMERATION (1991-2001)

34

ANNEX 3. THE SUPPLY AND MARKETING OF GRAINS, FRUIT AND FISH IN HYDERABAD URBAN AGGLOMERATION: DEMAND AND SUPPLY SCENARIO

35

ANNEX 4. ANDHRA BARRELA CATTLE MARKET, CHINTALAKUNTA (VANASTHALIPURAM)

37

ANNEX 5. PROFILES OF SELECTED URBAN AND PERI-URBAN DAIRY UNITS IN HYDERABAD

39

ANNEX 6. SYNDICATE FARMERS’ SERVICE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED

43

ANNEX 7. KUSHAIGUDA VEGETABLE MARKET 45

ANNEX 8. CORPORATE SECTOR IN FRUIT &VEGETABLE BUSINESS: CASE OF ITC'S CHOUPAL FRESH

46

ANNEX 9. THE ANDHRA PRADESH MUTUALLY AIDED COOPERATIVE SOCIETY ACT (1995)

47

ANNEX 10. THE COMPANIES (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2002. 78-108


V

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

HUA Hyderabad Urban Agglomeration

UPA Urban and Peri Urban Agriculture POs Producer Organizations SHGs Self Help Groups PACS Primary Agricultural Credit Societies LIPOs Low Income Producer Organizations Rs Indian Rupees HUDA Hyderabad Urban Development Authority MCH Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad HMWSSB Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply and Sanitation Board DOA Department of Agriculture DOAH Department of Horticulture KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS

# Term Definition

1. Producers Include low-income people whose livelihood depends on UPA-related activities or the food chain, including people involved in crop, livestock, fish and forestry production or exploitation, small-scale processing, marketing and preparation (such as hawking, street food vending, community-based catering systems).

2. Producer Organizations

Organizations or Institutional forms which address the constraints of producers especially the low income producers and decrease their vulnerability. These could be both formal and informal in nature. Any form of collectives or groups through which producers are able to derive services for better arrangements are treated as producer organizations

3. Urban – Peri Urban Agriculture

UPA can be defined as: the growing of plants and/or the raising of animals

for food and other uses (eg: recreation, environment improvement) within

urban and peri-urban areas, as well as the related production of inputs and

the processing and marketing of products. IDRC (International Development Research Centre) Canada gives the definition of UPA as: “Urban and Peri-Urban agriculture or UPA is an industry located within or on the fringe of a town, a city or a metropolis, which grows or raises, processes and distributes, diversity of food and non food products, (re) using largely human and material resources, products and services found in and around the urban areas”.


VI

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Rapid urbanization creates tremendous challenges in the provision of infrastructure, employment,

environmental management, food security, nutrition and health. Among the many challenges, one of basic and crucial challenge that remains is ensuring food and nutritional security within the urban zone. In this context urban and peri-urban agriculture (UPA) can make significant contributions by acting as;

• Source of livelihoods for a range of urban and peri-urban beneficiaries

• Means of addressing urban and peri-urban food and nutritional security

• Viable means of utilizing ‘appropriate’ bio-degradable urban waste and thus facilitating both an improvement in the urban environment and a return flow of recycle-able nutrients to UPA production systems

• Effective means of re-cycling urban wastewater (following appropriate pre-treatment, crop selection and the implementation of strict multi-barrier risk mitigation options to prevent negative impacts to producers and consumers as well as the sustainable use of soil resources)

• Catalyst for micro-enterprise development

• Means of achieving gender and social equity

• Means of optimizing land utilization However, currently in Hyderabad UPA and consequently, LIPOs fall outside of conventional research, institutional and funding support mechanisms. It is practiced without supporting policies or guidelines by small-and medium scale farmers but contributes to the urban food supply primarily in the form of, green fodder and dairy products (dominated by fresh milk) and increasingly, perishable vegetables. This report focuses primarily of green fodder (Paragrass) producers and urban dairies with. In a broader context, expanding wastewater irrigated leafy vegetable production and the key constraints and opportunities to the institutionalization and indeed wide-scale adoption of UPA activities in Hyderabad are discussed. Several key externalities are directly impacting on the long-term sustainability of peri-urban green fodder production and small scale urban dairies in Hyderabad. Escalating land prices in the current green fodder production areas ensure that land is increasingly being purchased for property development. Linked to the escalating land prices and loss of agricultural HUDA and MCH are actively implementing the ‘Musi Beautification Program’ which when completed will encroach on 1,600 acres currently under green fodder production. This is expected to result in a 63% reduction in fodder (Paragrass) entering the green fodder market. Further, a number of Acts enforced by MCH and issued as public notifications by the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad are restricting small scale urban milk producers. A further externality influencing the long-term stability of urban ‘fresh milk’ production systems is the Government Policy to promote the ‘branding’ of milk and processing/treatment prior to retail as a means of ensuring milk quality and public health. This is supported by the Prevention of Food Adulteration (PFA) Rules (1995). With regards supportive policies, there are two key State policies indirectly supporting the formation of LIPOs namely the AP Mutually Aided Cooperative Societies Act (1995) and the Companies (Amendment) Act, 2002. Limited water resources, is a key constraint for UPA in Hyderabad. In this regard in Hyderabad it is mandatory for all new constructions to have a rainwater harvesting structure either in the form of groundwater re-charge or water conservation. In addition, HMWSSB in association with the National River Conservation Directorate (NRCD) is undertaking the ‘Musi River Conservation Project’. Both these initiatives are managed by HMWSSB. The Musi River Conservation Project project document clearly states that the “treated sewage (secondary treatment)

from Amberpet and Nallahceruvu STPs (369 MLD) will be discharged into the existing irrigation

channels to support the current agricultural activities”. This is a marked improvement on the current use of non-treated urban wastewater.


VII

This is a clear indication of institutional support in terms of providing both water quantity and improved water quality for fodder, vegetable and rice producers along the Musi River. It is strongly recommended therefore that vegetable, fodder and rice producers along the Musi River form

producer organizations under the aforementioned Acts. It is envisaged that the formation of such cooperative structures will safeguard their current livelihoods and form a strong basis for direct dialogue with the HMWSSB and other line agencies. The formation of such producer organizations will also strengthen their lobbying power for services from government line agencies. With the increasing pressure on the land available for green fodder (paragrass) production it is strongly recommended that urban milk producers for a organizational structure to assist the ‘Green Fodder Association’ in lobbying for the protection of the existing fodder production area. Further it is recommended that the ‘Green Fodder Association’ and the urban dairy farmers and commercial dairy units partner with consumers buying fresh milk to facilitate official recognition of their trade and assure safety standards in all aspects of the production and consumption chain. INTRODUCTION Hyderabad is the capital city of the state of Andhra Pradesh and is also India’s 6th largest metropolitan city with a population in 2001 of 5.716 million registering a growth of 31 % over 1991. Currently in Hyderabad UPA falls outside of conventional research, institutional and funding support mechanisms. It is practiced without supporting policies or guidelines by small-and medium scale farmers. This report will focus primarily on green fodder production, the development of the Green Fodder Farmers Association and the linkages it has with informal small scale urban dairy producers. Externalities including rapid urban expansion, urban development programs and policies directly and indirectly impacting the peri-urban green fodder production - urban dairy system are discussed.


1

Chapter 1. Context analysis

1.1 Andhra Pradesh and Hyderabad Hyderabad is the capital city of the state of Andhra Pradesh (5th largest state in India, both in terms of area and population) located in South India in the heart of the Deccan Plateau is at 536 meters above sea level. Hyderabad is also India’s 6th largest metropolitan city and in terms of world ranking1 stands at 40th. For 2004-5 the GDP of Andhra Pradesh was US$59.1 billion with a growth rate of 9.8%. Over 49% of the state GDP is generated by the service industry with approximately 25% of India’s software professionals based in Hyderabad. The industrial sector in Andhra Pradesh is ranked 2nd in India in terms of industrial estates with the industrial sector accounting for 27% of state GDP. Andhra Pradesh is ranked 4th in terms of Foreign Direct Investment. With regards the agricultural sector, approximately 30% of the land are of AP is under agriculture with 22% under forest cover. Agriculture accounted for 22% of the state GDP in 2004-2005. Horticulture has been identified as one of the growth engines for Andhra Pradesh. In 2004-2005 the total area under horticultural crops was 1,533,000 ha with an annual production of 11,364,000 tonnes. Andhra Pradesh is the 2nd largest producer of fruits and vegetables in India and 1st in terms of mango, citrus, oil palm, chillies and tumeric. The horticulture sector in Andhra Pradesh accounts for 4.01% of the State’s GDP. In 2001, the population of the Hyderabad Urban Agglomeration (HUA) stood at 5.716 million registering a growth of 31 % over 1991 (Table 1: Annex 1). However, it is important to note that the growth rate varies significantly with the growth rate of MCH being 18.7% as compared to growth rates of 112.2% and 116.8% for Serlingampally and Qutubullapur, respectively. Population densities for the aforementioned areas of Hyderabad are 20,920, 4,443 and 1,581 person’s km2, respectively (Table 1: Annex 1).

Hyderabad Urban Agglomeration is located within Ranga Reddy District. Bordering the peri-urban limits of HUA north of Ranga Reddy District and towards the east/west of HUA (adjoining Quthbullapur, Medchal and Shamirpet) is Medak District and towards the east/west of Ranga Reddy District south of HUA (bordering Ghatkesakr, Keesara and Balangar) is Nalgonda District. The average daytime temperature in Hyderabad ranges from 25-30oC during November to February and 40-45oC during April-June. Annual precipitation is between 700-1000 mm yr-1 and falls predominantly during the 4 months of July to October. Soils are dominated by Red Sandy Soils with areas of Black Cotton Soil.

1.2 Urbanization process

This consists of the MCH, 10 municipalities and a vast area under Gram Panchayat. In order to plan for this composite area, the Government of Andhra Pradesh constituted the "Hyderabad Urban Development Authority" on 2nd October 1975. HUDA has prepared two master plans and 20 Zonal Development plans for this area of which one master plan and 18 Zonal Development plans are already notified by law and in force.

The HUA is now spread over the whole of the Hyderabad Urban Development Authority (HUDA) area of jurisdiction an area of 1348 km2 (Figure 1: Annex 1). HUDA covers the entire District of Hyderabad and parts of Ranga Reddy and Medak districts, it includes 173 km2 under Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad (MCH) 416 km2 under 10 Municipalities and 759 km2 under 105 gram panchayats (Figure 1: Annex 1). Further, during 1988 to 1999 the built up area increased from 49.3 to 62.4 % of the total geographical area of the HUA. This occurred primarily in Serlingampally and Qutubullapur, respectively (Table 1: Annex 2).

1Source: Census of India, 2001, Government of India


2

Agricultural land to the extent of about 128 km2 was converted to residential, commercial, institutional and industrial purposes during the period from 1973 to 19962. With the urbanization process, the radius of the HUA has expanded into the surrounding vacant lands and even water bodies. Over the

period from 1973 to 1996, the area under water bodies reduced from 118 to 110 km23. According to the 2001 statistics, HUA has a population of 6 million, a 17.2 % increase over the population of 1991 making it one of the fastest growing urban areas in India. Driving forces for urbanization are the rapid expansion of the service IT sector (including Winpro, Infosys, Microsoft) and outsourcing of services from the UK (e.g. HSBC Bank). In addition, there has been a rapid migration of families from rainfed rural A.P. in search of employment opportunities (primarily as construction labour) and to access government services. The rapid urbanization and influx of IT companies (and associated IT professionals) has resulted in a concomitant rise in land prices. The current district wise land prices in Hyderabad range from 85,098 US$ to 638,241 US$ per acre (Table 2). This has resulted in a rapid decline in area available for Urban and Peri-urban agriculture. However, the rapid increase in population has also resulted in a concomitant increase in the demand for food products including perishable vegetables and dairy products.

Table 2. District wise land prices (November. 2006) in and around Hyderabad Municipality Land Prices (Rs) sq

yard Rs per acre US$ per acre

Serilingampally 6000 29,040,000 638,241

MCH 1500 7,260,000 159,560

Kukatpally 1500-2250 7,260,000 – 10,890,000 159,560 – 239,340

Malkajgiri 4200 20,328,000 446,769

Alwal 1000 4,840,000 106,373

Khapra 3000-4500 14,520,000 – 21,780,000 319,120 – 478,681

L B Nagar 2250 10,890,000 239,340

Qutubullapur 800 3,872,000 85,098

Rajendra nagar 1800 8,712,000 191,472

Uppal 1500-2250 7,260,000 – 10,890,000 159,560 – 239,340

Uppal x road upto Musi River 60’depth

5000 24200000 531,868

Source: www.igrs.ap.gov.in

Chapter 2. UPA Profile 2.1 Historical development and status of UPA and Producers’ Organizations in the city

of Hyderabad With the expected shifts in rural-urban populations (60% of world population in urban centres by 2030) Urban and Peri-urban Agriculture (UPA) is increasingly being seen by city authorities as a means to address urban ‘food security’ (encompasses year round availability, accessibility and

affordability of ‘safe’ and nutritious food), income generation and a means of effectively utilizing municipal solid waste and wastewater. However, currently in Hyderabad UPA falls outside of conventional research, institutional and funding support mechanisms. It is practiced without supporting policies or guidelines by small-and medium scale farmers but contributes to the urban food supply primarily in the form of perishable vegetables, green fodder and dairy products (dominated by fresh milk).

3Source: EPTRI, 1996: 23; The Hindu, 25 January 1997, quoted in Ramachandraiah C. and Prasad S. Impact of Urban Growth on Water Bodies: The Case of Hyderabad. Centre for Economic and Social Studies, Hyderabad. Working Paper 60.2004.pg 7 4Ramachandraiah C. and Prasad S. Impact of Urban Growth on Water Bodies: The Case of Hyderabad. Centre for Economic and Social Studies, Hyderabad. Working Paper 60.2004.pg 7


3

This is also due to the fact that there has been considerable growth in the fodder cultivation and dairy farming sectors (including small urban producers) in the last 5-10 years. However, a number of externalities are now putting increasing pressure on the fodder/dairy system and hence chain of

economic beneficiaries which may negatively impact on small urban dairy producers. In addition, a producer organization (Green Fodder Farmers Association) is already functioning to try to address the issues of fodder producers in Hyderabad. Consequently, this report will focus on these three commodity groups namely perishable vegetables, green fodder and dairy products and associated producer organizations (formal and informal). A summary of the grain, fisheries and fruit food chain is given in Annex 3. 2.1.1 Horticultural production in Andhra Pradesh and the expansion of informal perishable

vegetable production in Peri-Urban Hyderabad. In Andhra Pradesh, the successful implementation of Horticulture Department programs has resulted in the area under horticultural crops being increased from 1.133 million ha in 1995-96 to 1.579 million ha in 2004-5. A breakdown of the crop type, area under cultivation and annual production is given in Table 3. This is to a large extent associated with the AP Micro-irrigation Project (Government Orders G.O. MS. Nos. 1328, 13131, 176, 175, 313 and 08) that was initiated in 2003. Under this scheme farmers are eligible for subsidies of up to 50,000 Rs (1098 US$) per family. In total between 3-11-03 and 31-03-06, 209.96 Crore Rs (46,145,054 US$) was provided in the form of subsidies to farmers. This program does not exclude Peri-urban farmers. Table 3. Horticultural Production in Andhra Pradesh (2004-2005)

Commodity Group

Fruit Vegetables Spices

Crop Type Area (ha)

Production (metric t) Crop Type

Area (ha)

Production (metric t)

Crop Type

Area (ha)

Production (metric t)

Mango 391896 3135096 Potato 3787 60592 Chillies 224474 538738

Orange & Batavia 109316 1421108 Tapioca 18759 375180 Tumeric 61833 241149

Lemon 50791 7000920 Sweet Potato 719 14380 Betelvine 2869 91521

Guava 10064 120763 Cucumber 3943 59145 Coriander 43301 30311

Banana 53465 1229695 Cabbage (Knol-Khol) 8225 98700 Tamarind 4668 46680

Grapes 1892 37840 Peas 176 1760 Garlic 1336 6680

Papaya 905 69232 Gourds 12817 128170 Arecanut 382 535

Sapota 13973 136935 Carrot 4278 85560 Cocoa 8221 1545

Pomegranate 5761 47816 Tomato 69502 1251036 Pepper 271 300

Custard Apple 908 4812 Egg Plant 24662 493240 Ajwan 1500 450

Others 2538 25380 Okra 24094 301175 Ginger 1608 2894

Total 641509 13229597 Onion 35414 566624 Total 350463 960803

Beans 16781 100686

Greens 9076 63532

Bottle Gourd 718 7180

Others 25494 254940

Total 258445 3861900

Source: Handbook of Horticultural Statistics 2006: Department of Horticulture, Government of Andhra Pradesh. Note: Table 2 does not include area under cashew, oil palm or coconut which accounted for 328,583ha in 2004-2005.


4

The high urban demand for perishable leafy vegetables (including, cabbage, spinach, amaranthis, fenugreek, mint, coriander and fennel) and limited storage capacity particularly during February to September is one of the key driver’s behind the expansion of wastewater irrigated vegetable

production in peri-urban Peerzadiguda, and Parvatapurum, Rangareddy District. Interpretation of time series satellite images (Figure 2 and 3: Annex 1) indicates that the wastewater irrigated area under leafy vegetable production has increased from 5.562 ha in 2002 to 16.017 ha in 2006. This corresponds to a 187.9% increase in leafy vegetable production between April 2002 and April 2006. 2.1.2 Dairy production in Hyderabad: Green fodder producers and informal urban dairy units. Waste water irrigated fodder (Paragrass: Gramineae Panicum purpurascens) is cultivation along the Musi River belt primarily in two main areas namely, Attapur and Uppal to Ghatkesar and Hyatnagar Mandals. During the confined course of the Musi River through urban Hyderabad with the exception of paragrass cultivation in the Musi River Bed there is no significant level of agriculture being practiced. Para grass cultivation in the Attapur area occupies an area of 172.75 acres (69.94 ha) (Figure 4). The primary areas of paragrass cultivation are located in the Uppal area, Ghatkesar Mandal and Hyatnagar Mandal and are either direct or lift irrigated with marginal quality water from the Musi River. As of April 2006 the area under paragrass in the Uppal area, Ghatkesar Mandal and Hyatnagar Mandal 1023.7 ha (2529.6 acres). The para grass grown areas are predominantly falling under Peerzadaguda, Parvatapuram, Marripalli, Kachivanisingaram, Qutbullapur, Timmaiguda, Pratap Singaram, Bacharam, Gaurelli, Makta, Korremul villages which are located all along River Musi. India ranks first in world milk production (Ramnath, 2002). Moreover, the annual rate of growth in milk production in India is between 5-6 % compared to 1 % globally. The steep rise in the growth pattern has been attributed to a sustained expansion in domestic demand (India Dairy, 2003). This is a result of Operation Flood (Phase I-III) which was initiated in the 1970’s to promote the formation of organized dairies at a district level and resulted in the establishment of 700+ dairies with a capacity of 200,000- 300,000 l d-1. However, this has a rural focus and does not take into account ‘urban’ and peri-urban milk producers. Andhra Pradesh has seen some dramatic increase in milk production over the last two decades, based primarily on buffaloes There was a 7.9% increase in the population of female buffaloes in 1999 as compared to 1993 (Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Andhra Pradesh, 2001). The milk production of Andhra Pradesh in 1991-92 was 2.9 million tonnes increasing to 4.9 million tonnes by 2003 (NDDB, 2003). Less than 20% of the milk is produced by industry in India. The remaining 80% is either for household consumption or is marketed through informal channels (Staal, 2001). According to the 17th Quinquennial Livestock Census 2003 there were 31,339 Buffalo and 4,357 Cattle within HUA. Dairy Cooperatives of Ranga Reddy District (rural) come under the jurisdiction of MOTHER DAIRY located at Hayathnagar, Hyderabad. Approximately, 28 dairy cooperatives supply milk to MOTHER DAIRY. The total liquid milk consumption in HUA is approximately 1.3 million l d-1. The contribution of packed and branded milk is 850-900,000 l d-1 with 400,000 l d-1 sold as ‘fresh’ milk supplied by private vendors in Ranga Reddy District (30-40km from HUA) and small dairy farms (<10 head) located within the HUA. The consumption of other milk products such as butter, ghee, milk powder, ice cream and curd is a further 100,000 l d-1. All of the milk products except for curd (which is supplied by small private dairies and home preparation accounts for nearly half of the curd consumption) are supplied by the organized dairies. Thus close to 65 to 70% of the city’s demand for milk and milk products are met by the organized dairies. Among the packed and branded milk supplied in the city, there are 4 cooperative dairies selling milk in the HUA with a total market share of 48% and the remaining 52 % is supplied by private dairies. Taking in to account the milk procurement area of the cooperative and private dairies, out of the total milk and milk products consumption, around 40-50 percent is met from the HUA, Nalgonda and Rangareddy districts. The remaining milk supply comes from other districts and states. While, the cooperative dairies procure milk from the milk producers in the villages, the private dairies located in the urban and peri-urban areas have their own dairy cattle for milk. Their procurement from other milk producers is negligible.


5

In dairy producer households, 25% of the milk produced (assuming a household of 6 members owns one buffalo) is retained for household consumption and 75% is sold. Dairy producers’ livestock also serves as a security asset in times of need (Buechler and Devi, 2003). Ensuring a stable and

sustainable quality fodder supply and efficient marketing structure is an essential component of the dairy industry (formal and informal) in Hyderabad. This is particularly pertinent for small scale low income urban producers.

2.2 Organization of the urban/peri-urban green fodder production and marketing

system, stakeholder analysis and linkages with urban dairy producers. 2.2.1 Attapur, Hyderabad. There is 172.75 acres (69.94 ha) of land belonging to 3 landowners in the Attapur area irrigated by the Musi River water (Figure 4: Annex 1). There are around 15-20 small sized dairy owners, who have taken the land on lease as per their fodder requirements. The lease rates are in the range of Rs 1500 (32.9 US$) to Rs 2000 (43.9 US$) per month per acre or 395 – 527 US$ per annum. The term of lease is for one year. The dairy owners can make the payments in 3 or more installments depending upon the mutual agreement between the land-owners and the dairy owners taking the land on lease. The land-owner is responsible for the irrigation of the fields of the different lessees. The irrigation is through pump sets, which are used to draw water from the Musi River. One caretaker is employed by the land-owner to take manage the irrigation. However, the salary is paid by the lessees based on the acreage leased. During the winter season, urea is required for better growth of the paragrass. Around one bag (50 kg) of urea is required per acre once during the winter season. The lessees purchase the urea and provide to the caretaker for application on their respective fields. Each of the dairy owners employs 1-2 persons to cut the fodder daily and transport it to the livestock shed. The transportation is through bullock carts owned by the dairy owners, or through rented rickshaws. The average distance between the fields and the livestock sheds is 2-4 km. In Attapur area, the fodder value chain is as follows4:

As stated earlier, there are around 15-20 dairies in the Kishanbagh area adjoining Attapur. The average herd size is 13-15 buffaloes of Murrah and Gujjar variety. The dairies procure green fodder from the leased fields and dry maize stock (Kutti) and feed concentrate or cottonseed oil cake purchased from the suppliers in the local market. The purchase is both on cash and credit basis. Out of the 4 respondents in the area, one had personally gone to Punjab to purchase the Murrah buffaloes, while the remaining had purchased the breeds from the local suppliers in Hyderabad city who in turn get the buffaloes from Punjab. The average yield of milk is 3-5 litres per buffalo per day. The total daily milk yield of a dairy with 15 head of buffalo is around 45-75 litres. The manual labour required for a 13-15 cattle size dairy is 4 persons. In almost all the dairies, 2-3 persons were employed as external labourers apart from the household labour. There is no involvement of women in either fodder collection or animal rearing.

4 Based on interviews and surveys of dairy cattle owners in the Kishanbagh area

Paragrass: Attapur Agricultural fields leased by urban land owners to dairy cattle owners Landowner responsible for

irrigation of leased fields

Dairy cattle owners (Location: Kishanbagh) Pay annual lease of 395-527 US$ to land owners Responsible for fodder cutting and transportation

Responsible for fertilizer inputs

Milk Consumers (Location: Attapur, Mehdipattnam) Hotels (70%) Households (30%)


6

More than 50 % of the dairies supply ’fresh’ milk to hotels and households located in the surrounding area. There are no middlemen involved in the purchase and supply of milk. Some of the dairy owners supply to households located as far as the Charminar area (5km from Attapur). The average retail

price of fresh milk is Rs 22 to 25 per litre. This results in a daily income, ranging from 21.7 US$ (22 Rs x 45 l) to 41.2 US$ (25 Rs x 75 l). Assuming that this milk is consistently produced at this rate 365 days per year this results in a gross income of 7,920 - 15,220 US$ (Note: This does not take into

account (outputs costs such as land rental, labour, feed concentrate, veterinary services etc). Around 5 percent of the milk is converted into Dahi.

2.2.2 Uppal District, Hyderabad As of April 2006 the area under paragrass in the Uppal area, Ghatkesar Mandal and Hyatnagar Mandal was 1023.7 ha (2529.58 acres). Preliminary results of collaborative IWMI-ILRI research indicate an

average yield (n=64 sample plots) of 19.325 (±2.87) t ha-1 (FW) or 7.823 t per acre. Paragrass is cut every 30-40 days (dependent on seasonal yield variations and demand) resulting in 10-12 cuts per year. With an average yield per cut of 19.325 t ha-1 (FW) for the total area under paragrass (1023.7 ha) this results in a combined annual fodder production of approximately 197,830 – 237,396 t yr-1 (FW). The average cultivated landholding by one land owner is 25-30 acres. Once planted annual re-seeding of paragrass is not required. As a result of the wastewater nutrient load, no external inputs are required for the growth of the paragrass. Pesticide is applied to control mosquitoes once every three months. Water supply is derived from the Musi River directly through in-field irrigation channels (previously established for rice) or via lift irrigation to the aforementioned irrigation channels. The agriculture labourers are paid Rs 1.5 (0.032 US$) for a bundle of 10 kg. This also requires loading the truck. The fodder labour consists of 35 % women. There is no discrimination in the rate paid to men and women. Labour consists primarily of migrants from rainfed areas of Andhra Pradesh. The land owners also employ a supervisor to manage irrigation and labour.

The average landholding in the area is 2 acres. However, to ensure a profitable turnover, a minimum of 25-30 acres (10.12 – 12.14 ha) of land should be cultivated to provide regular income. At present around 40 major land owners cum farmers are engaged in paragrass cultivation in the area. With an average land holding of 25-30 acres this accounts for approximately 45% of the area under paragrass. The rest of the former farmers/landowners have leased out their lands to the current practising farmers who are predominantly migrants from rainfed areas of Andhra Pradesh. Eight cultivators and 8 non-cultivating landowners were surveyed. All of the 8 cultivators have their own vehicle (2-5 tonne lorry) or tractor and the average cultivated land area is 28 acres. Five of the 8 are also real estate agents as an additional non-farm activity. One cultivator also has a family owned Cinema Hall. The age-group of the para grass cultivators is 28-37 years. The education level is intermediate to graduation level. Three of them also have livestock ranging from 3-5 buffalo. The remainder have given up dairying as they consider paragrass cultivation to be a more profitable activity. Labour shortage and low rates of milk in the Uppal area are stated to be the reasons for moving from dairy to fodder production. Out of the non-cultivating landowners surveyed, 5 had a household level landholding of less than 2 acres each. The reasons cited for giving up the land on lease were the non-availability of own transportation vehicle and lack of manpower to oversee the fodder cultivation. These 5 landowners preferred to work as agricultural labourers themselves earning a daily wage ranging from Rs 60 (1.31 US$) to Rs 100 (2.2 US$). A couple can earn 10.48 US$ (1.31 x 4hrs x 2 persons) to 17.6 US$ (2.2 x 4hrs x 2 persons) together by working for 4 hours in the field in the morning hours. The afternoons are free to pursue other labour work. The lease rates are Rs 2000 (44 US$) per month per acre. Agricultural labour followed by income from land lease is the major source of occupation/income. Two out of the five had two milch animals each. The milk was used for home consumption and surplus sold to the local traders at Rs 13 per litre (0.28 US$ per litre). Three of the non-cultivating landowners had around 15-20 acres of land at the household level (the individual landholding is on an average 2 acres, however in practice, the aggregate ownership for the households interviewed is 15-20 acres).


7

All of these were in the age group of more than 60 years and stated age and lack of family manpower to oversee the cultivation (of the three, all have children engaged in real estate or other business and two have one son each settled abroad) as the primary reasons for leasing the land. All three

landowner families derive around 80 % of the income from the lease of land (15-20 acres at 44 US$ per acre per month = 660 – 880 US$ per month).

In the Uppal area, the fodder value chain is as follows5:

2.3 The organization of the vegetable and fodder chain 2.3.1 Vegetables There are 4 major vegetable belts, which supply vegetables to the HUA namely, Shamirpet-Vantimamidi, Shamsabad-Shadnagar, Cheverala-Vikarabad and Medchal-Tupram. This vegetable catchment area meets 75 to 80 % of the demand in HUA in the 4 months from October to January. In the remaining 8 months, these vegetable production areas are only able to meet 30% of the demand in HUA. The residual demand in all seasons is met by supply from outside the HUA, from the following belts namely, Ibrahimpatnam to Chowtuppal, Vijaywada-Mangalgiri and Bangalore-Kolar. However, Hyderabad is a major trading center for vegetables. There are around 13 AMC regulated markets in HUA (6 in Hyderabad and 7 in RR district but part of the HUA) for trading of vegetables. The large number of wholesale vegetable merchants and commission agents cater to the supply of the HUA and also channel the supply to other districts of the state e.g. Karimnagar and also to distant places such as Khammam and Chennai for leafy vegetables. The practice is to purchase and load in own vehicles for transportation to other districts6. There are 6 Rythu Bazaars also established by the government in different parts of the HUA. The Rythu Bazaars are marketplaces where Rythus or vegetable producers can sell directly. However, as per an estimate, around 60 percent are non-producers. In Rythu Bazaars and other vegetable markets, small non-farmer retailers are women. However, no women are involved in the wholesale purchase activity. For further details of an informal market association namely Kushaiguda Market is given in Annex 6. Leafy vegetables produced in peri-urban Peerzadiguda, and Parvatapurum are primarily sold in Uppal vegetable market. Vegetables are in general harvested in the late afternoon and washed and stored in the producer’s household before being sold to wholesalers at the market in the early morning (5am – 6am).

5 Based on interviews and surveys of dairy cattle owners in the Kishanbagh area 6 This is to avoid chances of establishment of direct linkage between vegetable merchants from whom the Hyderabad based merchants and agents purchase and the merchants to whom they sell.

35-40 Paragrass growers (Location: Uppal) Average fodder cultivation area per grower is 30 acres Transportation is through

own lorries of growers

6 Brokers (Location: Golnaka market, Kacheguda) Commission of 5% is charged on the fodder value Transportation to dairy units is through bullock carts, rickshaws, trillers

Dairies (Location: Old city area, main market and outskirts) 10-12 goshalas (Location: Old city) Around 75 % supply is through the brokers and the remaining are direct contracts with producers


8

The value chain of vegetables is as follows:

2.3.2 Fodder Approximately 75 % of the paragrass production is traded in the Golnaka Green Fodder market, while the remaining 25% is traded directly with both large and small dairy units and Goshalas (Animal Breeding Units). Assuming an annual fodder production of approximately 197,830 – 237,396 t yr-1 (FW) this means that there is an annual through flow of approximately 148,372 - 178,047 t yr-1. This corresponds to a daily through flow of 400 – 487 t day-1. The fodder harvesting gets completed by 10 am and the trading time in the market is from 10 am to 1.30 pm (though there are no fixed timings). The rate is decided on the basis of market arrivals of fodder and the demand. Generally, the rate remains uniform over a period. ILRI-IWMI estimate (value derived from bi-weekly market fodder sampling Oct 2005 – Oct 2006) that paragrass (FW) is sold to buyers at a rate of approximately 1 Rs per kg (FW). This corresponds to a financial through flow of 400,000 – 487,000 Rs per day (8,791 – 10,703 US$). There are 6 brokers in the fodder market that receive 5% commission (Section 2.2.2) on green fodder sales. This corresponds to a daily individual income of per broker of 3,333 – 4,058 Rs (73 – 90 US$). Most of the fodder suppliers deal with only one broker. Thus over a period of time long-term relationships have been formed between the producers and the brokers. This also provided flexibility in payments. Though the system is that the producers are paid in cash by the brokers, who in turn supply around 50 % of the fodder to the suppliers on credit basis, one or two days may be delayed in making payments to the producers. Fifty percent of the cultivators drive their own vehicle to the market, while others have employed drivers. One person accompanies the driver to unload the grass bundles at the market. He is paid Rs 10 for unloading of one lorry. There are around 15-20 small rickshaw pullers, 10-12 bullock carts, 10-12 tangas (horse-pulled cart) and 15-20 auto riskshaw’s and 4-5 trillers which supply the paragrass to the different dairy units located in the old city area. There are 2-3 buyers (dairy unit owners) who bring their own vehicle to transport the grass. The rickshaw pullers have linkages with the dairy units in the city area and transport on a daily basis. The payment to such rickshaw pullers is on a monthly basis. The cultivators give Rs 50 (1.01 US$) as rent per vehicle daily to the market. The brokers pay around Rs 350 (7.70 US$) as monthly rent. The average rent paid to the Waqf Board is Rs 17,000 per month (373.6 US$). There are around 6 brokers in the Golnaka market; all of these have been dealing for more than 5 years. Each broker has at least two employees, one to make payments and both to keep track of loading and unloading for different clients. Apart from the rickshaw pullers, bullock cart and tanga owners around 5-8 hamalis (porters) also find work in the market area. There are 3-4 rooms in the market premises, which have been leased to one cattle feed trader (dealing in both concentrate feed and maize stova). It is estimated that over 1,000 individuals are directly related to the fodder market (Buechler and Devi, 2003). This includes casual farm labour, brokers, land owners and renters. The formal and informal dairy system is well organised in the city. For a detailed brief on Andhra Barrela Cattle Market (ABM), Chintalakunta and selected dairy farms refer to Annex 4 and 5.

Producer WH. Traders in wholesale mkts Semi-Retailers Retailers Rythu Bazaars or Storage for some veg Grading Grading

WH. Traders in nearest town


9

2.4 Constraint affecting low-income producer groups (Rapid diagnostic technique) Currently, the existing green fodder and urban dairy system particularly small urban producers is

economically viable and provides an integrated service e.g. procuring inputs, production and marketing. Inputs are cheap and currently available at the green fodder market. The urban dairy producers are operating in a high margin market as transport costs (and labour costs) are minimal due to close proximity of consumers and the fodder market. Consequently, infrastructural bottle necks are minimal. No reason economically to form a cooperative of ‘urban’ dairy producers to reduce production, operating and marketing costs. In addition, the current legal constraints discussed in detail in Section 3.2 would prevent ‘un-licensed’ urban dairy producers from highlighting their existence let

alone forming a registered organization. With regards the wastewater irrigated peri-urban leafy vegetable producers in Peerzadiguda, and Parvatapurum, Rangareddy District key constraints to the formation of low income vegetable producers is a paucity of robust scientific evidence of actual risks to producers and potential risks to consumers. The current vegetable producers along the Musi are operating without institutional support as the agricultural re-use of marginal quality waters is not covered by the respective line agencies. However, as stated in Section 5.1, HMWSSB has designed its STPs with agriculture as the end-user. As stated, the risk to producer, consumer and environmental health and the economic tradeoffs and benefits of wastewater activities in selected study sites along the Musi River are currently being investigated by IWMI and collaborating partners. The BMZ funded project entitled “Ensuring Health and Food Safety from Rapidly Expanding Wastewater Irrigation in South Asia” will develop, implement, validate and promote the uptake of a set of risk mitigation options (multi-barrier

approaches) based on a comprehensive assessment of risks and benefits associated with wastewater irrigation. Close collaboration is being established with relevant city partners particularly HMWSSB and the vegetable producers to ensure input, adoption and institutionalization of project outputs. A further constraint to the formation of low income vegetable producer organization/s along the Musi River Belt is public perception of the risks associated with ‘wastewater irrigated’ vegetables. Even if risk mitigation options are in place to prevent consumer health risks public perception may negatively impact sales.


10

Chapter 3. Institutional Profile

3.1 Key institutions operating in HUA: Potential role in supporting or constraining UPA

related activities As stated previously, currently in Hyderabad UPA falls outside of conventional research, institutional and funding support mechanisms. It is practiced without supporting policies or guidelines by small-and medium scale farmers. However, there are several formal and informal institutional forms primarily marketing orientated which operate in HUA and surrounding rural districts. These institutional forms include;

• Producer Organizations

• Primary Agricultural Credit Societies (PACS)

• Marketing Systems o Agricultural Marketing Committees o Retail Institutions o Informal Market Institutions

• Farmer Unions and Groups The most common form of ‘producer organization’ in rural areas of Andhra Pradesh are cooperatives which service all the needs of farmers especially small and marginal. These services range from provision of credit, seed, fertilizer, pesticides, lobbying and marketing services. These registered cooperatives have proper bylaws and business rules and comply with the requirements AP Mutually Aided Coop Society Act (1995) Amended 2002. An example of such an organization is the Syndicate Farmers’ Service Cooperative Society Limited (Annex 6). Further examples can be seen on the AP Online Website http://www.aponline.gov.in

Primary Agriculture Credit Societies (PACS) in India were established to provide rural farmers and rural poor access to finance. Since the inception of central Indian economic planning in 1950, the government has favored cooperative societies as a channel for providing credit and as a means of broadening the experience of villagers in such activities as marketing, community farming, and consumer purchasing. Credit societies were the first to be established and continue to be the most extensive and important group of cooperatives. Of the roughly 250,000 cooperatives in India in 1980, about 100,000 were PACS. By the late 1980s, because regional rural banks were doing more lending, the number of PACS had decreased to 87,300. By 1988 there were 93,000 PACS operating in rural areas, with a membership of 89.8 million. The societies aimed for universal membership in order that poorer members of society could join cooperatives and use their services. Total loans advanced by such societies amounted to nearly Rs 36.9 billion (791, 208,791 US$) during 1987. These rural agricultural credit societies had a share capital of about Rs10.1 billion (219,780,219 US$) at the end of June 1988. Thus PACS play a vital role of providing access to credit for rural farmers, producers and poor. To what extent there is scope to establish PACS for UPA requires further investigation.

Agriculture Market Committees (AMCs) are regulated market yards promoted across the rural areas of AP to provide just marketing service to the farmers. These are government recognized market spaces where registered traders (registered as sole proprietary firms) and intermediaries operate and by law are suppose to follow the minimum support prices announced by the State Government. The AMCs however tend to be exploitative as traders for cartels to ensure beneficial prices during the procurement process. Rythu Bazars or ‘Farmer Markets’ of the vegetables and fruits have been put in place by the government across Hyderabad (Section 2.3.1). These markets are places where the farmers can hire space at a nominal cost and sell their produce so that the margins gained by the market intermediaries are directly realized by the farmers. However, due to poor infrastructural links with peri-urban and rural areas time and labour constraints farmers end up selling their produce through intermediaries that occupy the concession market space.


11

Informal structures occur in the aforementioned markets namely informal norms for sharing business, fixing prices and entry and exit barriers as protective measures for existing traders. Retail markets in India in the form of ‘Malls and ‘Marts’ have boomed since 2000. Following the US and European

model, large malls, mega marts, hyper markets and supermarkets are being promoted. In Hyderabad stores that retail processed and fresh agricultural products include Food World, Trinethra, Ratandeep, Spencers Supermarkets, Reliance (opened 18 stores in Hyderabad in 2006), 24 Lettered Mantra (Organic) and Pure and Natural. These stores cater for middle and high income groups. In addition, there are numerous privately owned fruit and vegetable stores servicing local communities. Farming Unions and allied groups operate as both formal and informal groups and are primarily established to very specific temporary needs of farmers including protection of land and fighting for better prices. A listing of rurally based farmer groups and organizations servicing farmer needs in rural AP can be found at http://www.aponline.gov.in. Other emerging innovative market systems include Choupal Fresh details of which are given in Annex 7. In addition to the aforementioned formal and informal marketing structures several government and municipal agencies operate within HUA namely, HUDA, MCH and HMWSSB. In addition, the Department of Horticulture, Department of Agriculture and Department of Animal Husbandry Dairying and Fisheries (DADF) will also be discussed. As indicated in the following synopsis, UPA is not currently included directly and hence not supported within the mandate of any of the major line agencies and research and technology institutions, municipal organizations discussed above. However, there is considerable scope for the recognition and institutionalization of UPA by the DOH. Strategies to promote the future institutionalization of UPA in Hyderabad are, outlined in Section 3.3. In addition, potential linkages with HMWSSB will be discussed in Section 5.1. 3.1.1 Hyderabad Urban Development Authority (HUDA) The metropolitan area of Hyderabad was notified under the Andhra Pradesh Urban (Development) Act 1975 and termed as "Development Area". This consists of the MCH, 10 municipalities and a vast area under Gram Panchayat. In order to plan for this composite area, the Government of Andhra Pradesh constituted the "Hyderabad Urban Development Authority" on 2nd October 1975. HUDA's jurisdiction extends over an area of 1,348 km2. Covering the entire district of Hyderabad and parts of Ranga Reddy and Medak districts, it includes 173 km2 under Hyderabad Municipal corporation Area and 416 km2 under 10 Municipalities and 1273 km2 under 105 Gram Panchayats. HUDA has four primary functions namely;

• Planning: Preparation and revision of Master Plan and Zonal Development Plans

• Regulation and Control: To regulate and control the development through statutory plans and other measures.

• Development: To undertake various developmental projects in the Developmental Area. HUDA has prepared 2 Master Plans and 20 Zonal Development plans of which one Master Plan and 18 Zonal Development plans are already notified by law and in force.

• Coordination: To coordinate with other public agencies (namely MCH and HMWSSB) concerned with provisions of urban infrastructure, services and amenities.

During 2000-2005 HUDA through Dutch Government Funding undertook the Greening Hyderabad Environment Program (GHEP) which focused on the establishment of women’s SHG’s (+ access to credit), provision of seedlings and training in the nurturing of tree and ornamental plants to support the GHEP. Further details can be found at http://www.hudahyd.org.


12

3.1.2 Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad (MCH) Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad (MCH) is a local body established under Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act 1955 and covers an area of 169.3 km2. The Municipal Corporation is primarily the

main deliberative organ for Hyderabad. The Corporation meets for the transaction of business at such time and place as may be fixed by the Mayor, in his absence by the Deputy Mayor, and in the absence of both by the Chairman of the Standing Committee. Normally the Corporation meets twice in a month. Usually every meeting is open to the Public. The Obligatory duties of MCH relate to erection of substantially boundary marks defining the limits of the city; maintenance of public streets, roads, public health and other matters relating to sanitation and improvement of the city. However, under the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act 1955 MCH is implementing a number of Acts that are directly impacting on urban and peri-urban dairy producers and hence indirectly on green fodder producers. This is discussed in detail in Section 3.2. Further details regarding MCH can be found at http://www.mch.org. 3.1.3 Hyderabad Municipal Water Supply and Sanitation Board (HMWSSB) Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply and Sanitation Board was constituted on 1st November 1989 under the provisions of Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Act 1989 (Act No . 15 of 1989). The functions and responsibilities of HMWSSB in the Hyderabad Metropolitan Area are to supply potable water including planning, design, construction, maintenance, operation & management of the water supply system. In addition, HMWSSB is responsible for sewerage, sewerage disposal and sewerage treatment works including planning, design, construction, maintenance, operation & management of all sewerage and sewerage treatment works. In this regard HMWSSB will play a key role in future UPA activities as discussed further in Section 5.1. For further information on HMWSSB refer to http://www.hyderabadwater.gov.in.

3.1.4 Department of Agriculture (DOA) The Department of Agriculture (DOA) provides agricultural extension services primarily for grain crops to rural farmers and transfers the latest technical knowledge to the farming community, including the introduction of high yielding varieties, laying demonstrations, imparting training to farmers to improve skills & knowledge to increase agricultural production and productivity. The other objectives of the DOA are to assess requirements of agriculture inputs well in advance and to regulate their production and monitor timely supply of seeds, fertilizers and pesticides, farm implements and credit to farmers. The DOA also performs statutory functions under various acts and regulations to ensure supply of quality inputs i.e., seeds, fertilizers and pesticides to farmers and quality of outputs. The DOA also carries out certain other facilitating functions including; soil testing, soil and water conservation, soil survey, credit assessment/provision, media production, training to farmers, monitoring and evaluation, disaster management, crop insurance, agricultural mechanization and extending technical assistance to various agencies. However, it is critical to note that the activities of the DOA are directed at ‘rural’ agricultural production. UPA currently falls outside the mandate of the DOA. 3.1.5 Department of Horticulture (DOH) The objectives of the DOH are to provide holistic growth in horticulture through research, technology promotion, extension and marketing; to enhance horticulture production in Andhra Pradesh to 300 million t yr-1 by 2011-12; to establish convergence and synergy among various ongoing and planned programs and to promote the development and dissemination of technologies by blending traditional wisdom and frontier knowledge. Further details can be found at http://www.aponline.gov.in. The strategies adopted by the DOH to achieve the stated objectives include the adoption of an end to end approach covering production, post harvest management, processing and marketing; the promotion of R&D of technologies for production, post harvest management processing in potential belts/clusters; to enhance acreage, coverage and productivity in potential belts/clusters; to facilitate capacity building and human resource development and to promote where appropriate, National Dairy Development Board (NDDB) model of cooperatives among horticultural producers.


13

In addition, the Andhra Pradesh DOH has a Horticulture Training Institute the objectives of which are to; identify the training needs of the department; have a significant impact in service training to technical staff of the DOH with regards modern technologies in different sectors of horticulture, to

provide high impact training to progressive horticulture farmers of the State of Andhra Pradesh and to provide professional training to private individuals and businesses on value added ornamental horticulture. In the 1980’s the DOH actively promoted UPA at the direct request of municipal stakeholders including the State Railway Employees and within the Military Cantonment areas. The DOH provided ‘mini kits’ including seed and fertilizers and provided training. The key constraint to the continued (Personal communication with the Horticulture Commissioner Mr. Anil Punetha) adoption and expansion of this program was the perceived lack of space within urban areas. This is currently being addressed by the RUAF-CFF Project (Section 3.3).

3.1.6 Department of Animal Husbandry Dairying and Fisheries (DADF) The Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying (AH&D) - now renamed as Department of Animal Husbandry Dairying & Fisheries (DADF) is a Department in the Ministry of Agriculture and came into existence in, 1991, by converting two divisions of the Department of Agriculture and Cooperation namely Animal Husbandry and Dairy Development into a separate Department. The Fisheries Division of the Department of Agriculture and Cooperation and a part of the Ministry of Food Processing Industries were later transferred to this Department in 1997. The Department is responsible for matters relating to livestock production, preservation, protection from disease and improvement of stocks and dairy development, and also for matters relating to the Delhi Milk Scheme and the National Dairy Development Board. It also looks after all matters pertaining to fishing and fisheries, inland and marine. The Department advises State Governments/Union Territories in the formulation of policies and programmes in the field of Animal Husbandry, Dairy Development and Fisheries. The main thrust areas are: • Development of requisite infrastructure in States/UTs for improving productivity, • Preservation and protection of livestock through provision of health care, • Strengthening of Central livestock farms (Cattle, Sheep and Poultry) for development of superior

germ plasm for distribution to states and, • Expansion of Aquaculture in fresh & brackish water, and welfare of fisher-folk etc. Registered dairies (under the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act 1955 amended under Andhra Pradesh Ordinance No. 17 of 1996) can avail of the services provided by the DADF.

3.2 Policies and legal aspects concerning UPA and Producer Organizations Escalating land prices in HUA are ensuring that land is increasingly being purchased by property developers. As indicated in Section 2.2 small landowners in the green fodder production area in Uppal are selling their land or leasing their land to migrants from rainfed rural areas of AP. Linked to the escalating land prices and loss of agricultural land HUDA and MCH is actively enforcing the Urban Land Sealing Act of 1976 which limits urban plot size to 4,000 sq ft (370 m2). This fall under the ‘Musi Beautification Program’. Briefly, ‘beautification’ work is proposed to be taken up along the 15 km stretch of the Musi River by dividing it into two zones – a Garden Zone and a Heritage Zone. The Garden Zone comprising 1600 acres will be developed into an area with gardens, landscaping, parks, amusement, art plaza, food courts, open auditorium for cultural events and a golf course. The Heritage Zone, while protecting heritage buildings like High Court, Salar Jung Museum, City Library and Osmania General Hospital, will be developed into a tourist spot with shopping complexes. HUDA acquisition of land to facilitate the ‘Musi Beautification Scheme’ is set at a rate of Rs 800 per sq yard (85,098 US$ per acre). This is in contrast to the land prices outlined in Table 2 and has result in significant conflict between landowners and HUDA. The land designated under the ‘Musi Beautification Program’ is currently under paragrass cultivation and provides an input to the green fodder market. Loss of 1600 acres may result in a potential loss of 125,168 – 150, 201 t yr-1 of paragrass (7.823 t per acre x 1600 acres x 10-12 cuts).


14

This accounts for approximately 63.3% of the annual paragrass yield. This poses a significant threat to the formal and informal urban dairy industry in Hyderabad. A further pressure on the area under fodder production is the rapid conversion to leafy vegetables as stated in Section 2.1.1 the area under

leafy vegetable production along the Musi River has increased from 5.562 ha in 2002 to 16.017 ha in 2006. (Figures 2 and 3). This corresponds to a loss in the area available for paragrass production of 10.455 ha and an annual loss of 231 tonnes (19.322 t per cut as 12 cuts x 10.455 ha) of fodder entering the fodder market. As indicated in Section 3.1 MCH is currently enforcing several Acts under the HMC Act 1955 that directly impact on small and medium scale urban dairy producers. Specifically, Section 407 of HMC Act 1955 (amended under Andhra Pradesh Ordinance No. 17 of 1996) animals (Milch Cows and Buffalos) should not be tethered on streets or other public utility places. Under Section 510/511, no person shall keep any animal on his premises, so as to be a nuisance or danger to any person or stabled animals. Section 540 prohibits the import of cattle into the city without prior permission in writing of the Commissioner. In pursuance of provisions under section 623, permission is required to run urban dairy units as per by-laws 1964. Permissions to keep dairy animals are accorded vide a license obtained from MCH which operates under conditions 1-15 of the 1964 by-law including; prohibition to run dairy or cattle sheds within 200 m of any human habitation or plot of land approved for residential building construction, dairy unit must provide sufficient open space within boundary and number of cattle to be kept as per the prescribed floor space. These conditions are to ensure public safety, health and convenience. If a dairy owner is unable provide the aforementioned conditions laid down in the 1964 by-laws no license is issued. Consequently, the owner is called upon to either obtain a license by fulfilling all the conditions required or to shift the livestock outside the city premises within one month from the date of receipt of notice. If the owner does not comply, MCH will relocate the livestock at the owners risk and cost. In addition in 1996 in support of Andhra Pradesh Ordinance No. 17 the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad issued the following notification (No. TR.T5/938/96: Office of the Commissioner of Police Hyderabad City (Date: 3.4.1996) to persons running private, dairy farms that in order to ensure smooth flow of traffic and to prevent obstruction and inconvenience to the public the straying of cattle in any street or trespassing upon any private or government property including on to the roads within the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad is prohibited at any time, day or night. Any such cattle found straying in the streets will be seized by the police and impounded in the cattle pound. Further, notification in 2004 (No.TR.T5/1761/2004: Office of the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad City Date 29.08.2004) specifies the cost of ‘lifting’ and feeding charges during the 10 day period of impoundment. Any animal not claimed after 10 days is auctioned and the proceeds enter the MCH budget. However, it is critical to note that this is a ‘complaint driven process’ with fines ranging from 300 Rs to 1000 Rs (6.5 – 22 US$) for the 1st to 3rd offence, respectively. Consumer demand for ‘fresh milk in HUA is estimated as 400,000 l d-1 (Section 2.1.2) as supplied by private vendors and small dairy farms (<10 head) located within the HUA. This is a considerable demand that drives the existing system. A further externality influencing the long-term stability of urban ‘fresh milk’ production system is that the milk is unprocessed and ‘non-branded’. The Government Policy is to promote the ‘branding’ of milk and processing/treatment prior to retail as a means of ensuring milk quality. This is supported by the Prevention of Food Adulteration (PFA) Rules (1995) which stipulates x7 types of processed milk for retail. Further, milk/dairy products are covered under the Essential Commodities Act (1955) which has special provision for milk and dairy products as an essential commodity. The Indian Government recognizes that in the formal dairy sector, that since the global market has become more demanding in terms of quality, safety and timely delivery, installation of the ISO 9000 Quality Management System and HACCP by the food industry is essential for getting a competitive international edge. In addition, media promotion is targeting housewives to purchase ISO 9000 Quality Assured milk.


15

There are a two key State policies indirectly supporting the formation of LIPOs in UPA namely the AP Mutually Aided Coop Society Act (1995) and the Companies (Amendment) Act, 2002. The former act was formed to provide for the voluntary formation of cooperative societies in the state of Andhra

Pradesh, India. This enactment was the final step in an effort to create a new legislative environment for cooperatives in Andhra Pradesh. The Act provides for the voluntary formation of cooperative societies as accountable, competitive, self reliant business enterprises, based on thrift, self-help and mutual aid and managed and controlled by members for their economic and social betterment and other matters connected. The latter act actively promotes the formation of ‘Producer Companies’. Full details of both the AP Mutually Aided Coop Society Act (1995) and the Companies (Amendment) Act, 2002 can be found in Annex 9 and 10. Further, with regards access to credit, all banks in India must follow RBI (Reserve Bank of India) Rules which stipulate that 30-45% of all funds retained by the bank must be issued as loans to the agricultural sector and/or though microfinance programs for cooperatives, urban joint liability groups or SHGs. This is closely supported by the AP Mutually Aided Coop Society Act (1995) and the Companies (Amendment) Act, 2002 (Annex 9 and 10).

3.3 Overview of UPA innovations in the city IWMI www.iwmi.org is currently coordinating two initiatives in Hyderabad. The objective of the IDRC/DGIS funded Cities Farming for the Future programme (RUAF-CFF) is to contribute to poverty reduction, food security (encompasses year round availability, accessibility and affordability

of ‘safe’ and nutritious food, improved urban environmental management (safe reuse of urban organic waste and wastewater), empowerment of urban and peri-urban farmers and participatory city governance. This is to be achieved through capacity development of local stakeholders in urban and peri-urban agriculture and by facilitating participatory and multi-stakeholder policy formulation and

action planning. The RUAF-CFF (Cities Farming for the Future) is a global initiative, which aims to facilitate the integration of UPA in the policies and programmes of national and local governments, technical departments, research centers and NGO’s www.ruaf.org. RUAF-CFF specifically aims to improve access of local stakeholders in urban and peri urban agriculture to documented experiences in crop production, forestry, and animal production, improved land use and the re-use of urban wastes for productive purposes. It also aims to enhance the awareness of international, national organizations and local governments of the potentials (and risks) of UPA through capacity development with the objective of enabling practical policy and technology interventions. IWMI is the South and Southeast Asia Coordinator of the RUAF-CFF Project.

The RUAF-CFF Project will directly contribute to achieving MDGs (1 & 7). To realize this objective, the programme seeks to apply an integrated approach with six components, which mutually reinforce each other and in combination will deliver the desired results. 1. Consolidation of the regional RUAF’s: Strengthen the actual “regional focal points on UPA” in

order to create sustainable and effective Regional Resource centers on UPA that provide information services, training and policy advice to municipalities, NGO’s and other national and local stakeholders in urban agriculture in their region.

2. Capacity Development: Development of required training capacity and organisation of training activities to enhance the capacities of local stakeholders in UPA (Municipal Departments, farmer organisations, NGO’s, research institutes, planners) for the successful engagement in multi-stakeholder policy design and action planning and implementation on UPA.

3. Knowledge management: Design and targeted distribution of guidelines, information packages, working methodologies and instruments by the various local stakeholders and improvement of their access to relevant information as well as maintenance of databases and publication of Urban Agriculture Magazine.


16

4. Facilitation of Participatory Policy formulation and Action planning: Assist in the realisation of processes of multi-stakeholder policy formulation and action planning including the realisation of policy awareness seminars, participatory appraisals, participatory design and implementation of

pilot projects. 5. Gender mainstreaming: Ensure that training, policy formulation, project development and

monitoring activities are gender sensitive by integration of gender in all RUAF methodologies and instruments, training activities, and gender differentiated project design and monitoring systems as well as by commissioning gender case studies and preparation of guidelines and publications on gender and UPA).

6. Promotion of learning through monitoring: Ensure that all local actors participating in the programme start using participatory and results oriented process and impacts monitoring methods.

A fundamental component of the RUAF-CFF is to establish a Multi-stakeholder Process for Action planning and Policy Design (MPAP) that will create an equitable and mutually acceptable policy environment for UPA. In Hyderabad a series of activities have been initiated to facilitate this process namely the formation of a UPA Enabling Team, generic and targeted capacity building programs, exchange visits, policy awareness seminars and formation of actions plans for the implementation of pilot projects. For further detail refer to the RUAF-CFF South and Southeast Asia website http://www.iwmi.cgiar.org/southasia/ruaf/about.html. The risk to producer, consumer and environmental health and the economic tradeoffs and benefits of wastewater activities in selected study sites along the Musi River are currently being investigated by IWMI and collaborating partners. The BMZ funded project entitled “Ensuring Health and Food Safety from Rapidly Expanding Wastewater Irrigation in South Asia” will develop, implement, validate and promote the uptake of a set of risk mitigation options (multi-barrier approaches) based on a comprehensive assessment of risks and benefits associated with wastewater irrigation. These options will be evaluated in the context of WHO and FAO wastewater re-use guidelines. Close collaboration is being established with relevant city partners particularly HMWSSB (Section 5.1) to ensure input, adoption and institutionalization of project outputs.

Chapter 4. Organization Profile: Producers’ Collective 4.1 Context of Origin

Till the beginning of the 1960s, the agricultural fields alongside the Musi River continued to grow paddy, sorghum, millet and vegetables, both for household and market consumption. Three crops were grown with the help of irrigation water from Musi River. After the mid sixties, as the inflow of untreated wastewater in the River Musi increased, it became increasingly unsuitable for these crops particularly in the Uppal area. The affected farmers thus had to search for alternate crops. It was felt that fodder crops would be the best alternative. Regarding the introduction of paragrass (Gramineae Panicum purpurascens) variety of fodder on these fields, there are two different versions available from the farmers interviewed.7 The first indicates that after informal consultations with farmers in and around city, they came to know that a particular variety of grass was being grown in similar wastewater irrigated areas in Bombay. Alternatively a group of farmers, while exploring different fodder grass varieties went to Punjab Agricultural University Campus at Ludhiana and brought a few samples of fodder grass from there. Out of these varieties, paragrass was discovered to be most suitable for feeding to dairy cattle, as it gave the best milk yield among the fodder grass varieties tried out in the area.

7 The versions were provided by elderly farmers, who had witnessed the change from paddy and vegetables to paragrass. These farmers were also actively involved in the formation of the Green Grass Growers’ Association, based at Uppal. It was not possible to validate either of the versions from other members due to the fact that the farmers from the older generation were not available for comment. Some have died, while others have given up farming and have settled elsewhere.


17

In addition, it was found to tolerate the declining water quality and require nominal labour inputs. After successful trials by some farmers, the entire agricultural belt in the Uppal area and also the Attapur area took up paragrass cultivation on the wastewater irrigated agricultural lands.

4.2 Brief Historical Description 4.2.1 Collective Activity by Paragrass Producers By the end of the 1960s, the entire Uppal belt had come under paragrass cultivation. While there were informal consultations and information sharing among the farmers in the entire process of exploration of new fodder grass varieties and other related areas, there was no formal forum or organization to undertake these activities. Limited support was provided by government line agencies. Moreover, the above-mentioned initiatives were taken mostly by the entrepreneurial larger landowners in the area. The next common concern was to search for a suitable and stable market. As indicated by one dairy owner, there were more than 40,000 milch animals within HUA at that time. Thus the farmers began to look for a market place in the city area. After mutual discussions, it was decided that an association of the fodder producers be formed to take up the activities including the search for a suitable market place and negotiations with dairy owners and brokers. The ‘Green Grass Growers Association’ was thus formed. The market place came to be arranged on an open private land space in Chaderghat area in what is now known as the old city. The Association also took up the issue of multiple ‘taxation’8 of fodder vehicles on their way to the market. However, once the market was identified and the daily fodder trading process streamlined, there was no attempt to formally register the Association or to take up any further activities through the forum. The fodder market continued in the Chaderghat area till 1982, when the land owners asked them to vacate. The brokers and some of the fodder grass producers searched and held discussions at several places in the city area for another market place. Finally, the Waqf Board of the Masjid (Mosque) situated at Golnaka area in Kacheguda agreed to lease the current open space, adjoining the Masjid to them9 on an annual basis. Since then the fodder grass market has been functioning from the Golnaka market, on an area of around 2,500 m2. Since 1982 onwards, the fodder producers and brokers had also been seeking government support for sanction of a permanent market place for the fodder market in the city area. Around the mid nineties, the market place again came under threat as a result of a bi-law issued by the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad (MCH). This bi-law, prohibits the movement of buffalo, bullock carts, rickshaws, tongas and fodder transportation vehicles due to their nuisance to traffic and discharge of manure onto city streets. In the wake of this renewed common threat, the collective action among the producers and brokers again gained momentum. By this time, most of the farmers who had been associated with the Green Grass Growers Association had either given up agriculture or had settled elsewhere. Most of them have sold part of their lands and given the remaining land on lease to the existing active fodder producers. There were more young producers in the age-group of 22-35, who were now cultivating their own lands and/or leased lands of other land owners. A high court order was obtained stayed the pressure imposed by MCH to vacate the existing market location. The group of farmers obtained formal and informal legal advice and as a result they were advised to form an organization to collectively pursue their interests. Thus the active producers formed a new organization named the ‘Farmers Green Paragrass Growing Society’. It remained active in 1998 and in 1999 was registered under the AP Societies Registration Act. The major objective of the society was to seek government land for the formal establishment of a green fodder market. The new organization met and presented their case to concerned government officials in the Agricultural Department and MCH. Finally, the Agricultural Market Committee agreed to allot a vacant government plot of 2982 m2 adjacent to the Old Slaughter House (known as Kacheguda Kamela) located at Golnaka which comes under the jurisdiction of Mandal Revenue Officer (MRO) Himayathnagar village.

8 Both toll tax and the bribes collected by police and revenue officials. 9 The area is leased to Mr. Arif, who is a fodder grass broker. However, all the other brokers are equally involved in the maintenance of the market place and the trading activity.


18

However, there are several problems associated with the usage of the allotted plot for fodder market. Firstly, there are municipal pipelines going from below the plot and thus in case if any repairs are required, the digging up and repair activity would require the stalling of business. Secondly, the

approach road to the allotted plot from the market passes through a Basti whose residents are objecting to the market place as it would involve heavy traffic of vehicles, rickshaws etc and also leading to cleanliness problems. Thirdly, with a change in state government, support for the producers declined. Another recent development affecting the farmer producers in the Uppal area is the threat of land acquisition by Hyderabad Urban Development Authority (HUDA) as part of the Musi Beautification Program. This has led to the formation of a new collective association known as the ‘Uppal Raithu Sangam’ which is also in the process of being registered under the AP Societies Registration Act (2001). The objective of the ‘Uppal Raithu Sangam’ is to represent the interests of farmers who will be directly or indirectly affected by the land acquisition process and negotiate with the government to exempt their lands from the acquisition process. The farmers are at present actively involved in mobilization of public opinion on the issue and highlighting the issue through the media and other forums.

4.2.2 Producer Organization Profile Thus since the fodder grass cultivation was introduced along the Musi River three organizations have been formed at different points in time. The following section attempts to analyze the collective organizations on different parameters:

Parameter Green Grass Growers

Association

Farmers Green Para

Grass Growing’ Society

Uppal Raithu Sangam

Formation 1968 1996 2005

Legal Status Not registered AP Societies Registration Act

Registration in process

Membership profile

Land Owners and Grass Growers

Grass Growers Small (< 2cres) to large(>5 acres) land owners

Geographic Location of members

Uppal area 20 villages in Ghatkesar Mandal

Land owners affected by the land acquisition plan related to the ‘Musi Beautification Program’ of HUDA in the Uppal area

Purpose / Objectives

-Establishment of a market place for fodder trading -Negotiations with brokers and buyers for terms of purchase -Establishing norms for market operational issues -Negotiating with government for tax exemption and reducing harassment

-Representation to the government for permanent market place with maintenance facilities to be provided by the government

-Lobbying for exemption of land from acquisition by HUDA

Activities undertaken

- Market place established at Chaderghat - Fodder trading system put in place- including no. of brokers, rate determination, payments - Government permission to pay a monthly charge to the concerned department in return for permission to transport fodder grass daily

- Government Land allocated for new market - Further negotiations stalled due to various problems and non- cooperation and delays from concerned government departments and district administration

-Representation made to ministers and Central Government (Sri Digvijay Singh) - Highlighting the issue in media through articles and interviews

Bye Laws or Norms

-Not made -Not available -Not made till date


19


Association

Farmers Green Para


Uppal Raithu Sangam

Governing Body - Office bearers elected by mutual consensus -No formal or clear definition of roles and responsibilities

- Office bearers elected by mutual consensus s -No formal or clear definition of roles and responsibilities

- Office bearers elected by mutual consensus -No formal or clear definition of roles and responsibilities

Managerial Structure

-No separate operating or managerial structure -All activities undertaken by the governing body together as a team



Decision Making mechanisms

Informal consultations among the active members and the office bearers



Meetings and Participation

1-2 meetings held in the beginning at the time of formation

-Informal meetings at the village level and at the Golnaka market -Active participation of brokers also - No regular meetings held. When some issue comes up, members are informed to come for discussions

-1-2 formal meetings till date

Involvement of Women

No women members or office bearers

No women members or office bearers or brokers

No women members or office bearers

Interests- common and conflicting, solidarity

-Group formed on common interest - No conflicting interests among producers came up during period of active functioning -Different political affiliations were one of the reasons for not taking up further activities from the forum

- Group formed on common interests

-Formed on common interest and common political affiliations - No involvement of farmers whose lands not affected and with different political affiliation

Funds and Resources for the organization

Internally mobilized from members for expenses. No formal records maintained

Active office bearers make expenses. After the amount becomes considerable, they orally detail about the expenses and collect per head contribution from willing members and brokers

No information. As per the office bearers, they are bearing the entire expense on their own

Infrastructure, inputs and services for the organization

-No infrastructure owned or rented by the org. -Contribution for maintenance of premises by both producers and brokers. Overseen by the brokers

-No infrastructure owned by org. or producers - Contribution for premises rent and maintenance of premises by both producers and brokers. Cleaning and maintenance overseen by the brokers - Legal services hired

- No infrastructure owned by the organization services - Legal services hired from outside


20


Association

Farmers Green Para


Uppal Raithu Sangam

from outside

Partnership with other actors

- For Golnaka market general maintenance, contributions are provided by all shop owners inc. them -

-Media and political party workers and office bearers

Strategies for future access to resources/ markets

- Representation to government - Follow up with government departments

- Agitation and lobbying with the government - Litigation

Chapter 5. Conclusions and Recommendations 5.1 Long-term trends in UPA in Hyderabad: As stated previously, UPA activities in Hyderabad fall outside of conventional research and institutional support mechanisms. It is practiced in small spatially scattered locations without supporting policies or guidelines by small-and medium scale farmers but contributes to the urban food supply primarily in the form of perishable vegetables, green fodder and dairy products (dominated by fresh milk). Key constraints to the institutionalization and indeed widescale adoption of UPA activites include;

• Lack of awareness amongst the public, NGOs, Government Departments and private sector on the potential benefits of UPA.

• Availability of land and escalating land prices

• Lack of supporting policies

• Intense competition for available water resources

• Lack of an institutional home for UPA

• Lack of a centralized source of essential resources for UPA namely; seed, fertilizer, growth medium, tools, no space/low space technologies.

• Lack of capacity in line agencies (particularly DOH) directed specifically at UPA

• Lack of targeted (targeted to different socio-economic groups) training materials for the cultivation, value added processing and marketing of UPA commodities.

• With the exception of urban dairies, there is a lack of formal/informal locally available (planned and implemented through multi-stakeholder action planning activities) bright spots demonstrating the viability of UPA activities.

5.1.1 Supportive Policies However, there are a number of government policies actively indirectly support the formation of LIPOs in UPA namely the AP Mutually Aided Coop Society Act (1995) and the Companies (Amendment) Act, 2002. The former act was formed to provide for the voluntary formation of

cooperative societies in the state of Andhra Pradesh, India. This enactment was the final step in an effort to create a new legislative environment for cooperatives in Andhra Pradesh. The Act provides for the voluntary formation of cooperative societies as accountable, competitive, self reliant business enterprises, based on thrift, self-help and mutual aid and managed and controlled by members for their economic and social betterment and other matters connected. The latter act actively promotes the formation of ‘Producer Companies’. Full details of both the AP Mutually Aided Coop Society Act (1995) and the Companies (Amendment) Act, 2002 can be found in Annex 8.


21

5.1.2 Access to Credit With regards access to credit, all banks in India must follow RBI (Reserve Bank of India) Rules which stipulate that 30-45% of all funds retained by the bank must be issued as loans to the

agricultural sector and/or though microfinance programs for cooperatives, urban joint liability groups or SHGs. This is closely supported by the AP Mutually Aided Coop Society Act (1995) and the Companies (Amendment) Act, 2002 (Annex 9). In India in 2005, 14 million poor families had access to micro finance through 881,154 SHGs (90% SHGs are all women) linked to over 30,000 branches of 504 banks comprising commercial banks, regional rural banks and cooperative banks (Source:

Presentation of Ms Ranjana Kumari - NABARD Chairperson at Micro credit summit in Dhaka on 16th

February 2004). It is estimated that in 2005, almost 260 million people in India were living under the internationally accepted poverty line of 1 US$ a day. Adjusted for the purchasing power, some 39% of India's population would be considered as poor. The Government of India, since independence, has been making concerted efforts to provide financial services to the poor at affordable cost. Despite all these efforts, there still exists a massive gap between the demand for credit by poor households and the supply of credit by formal financial and social institutions. Of the 75 million poor households in India, (60 million rural households and 15 million urban households), it is estimated that the total annual requirement of credit for rural households would be at least Rs. 120 billion (2.6 billion US$) on the basis of Rs. 2000 (43.9 US$) per family. Another estimate for micro finance services, excluding housing, is Rs. 500 billion (10.9 billion US$) assuming that annual average credit usage is Rs. 6000 (131 US$) per rural poor household and Rs. 9000 (197 US$) per urban poor household. In addition, the clients require saving and insurance services. The dependence of poor on informal and non-institutional sources of credit still remains very high. For further details refer to www.sidbi.com. Concerted efforts are required to ensure that UPA and related producer organizations are able to access, micro-credit.

5.1.3 Access to water resources With regards water resources, it is currently mandatory in Hyderabad for all new constructions to have a rainwater harvesting structure either in the form of groundwater re-charge or water conservation. This is managed by HMWSSB. In addition, HMWSSB in association with the National River Conservation Directorate (NRCD) is undertaking the ‘Musi River Conservation Project’. The project area covers the entire MCH area of 169.3 km2 and Uppal and Malkajigiri Municipalities, Osmania University and Cantonment Areas in full and part of 5 surrounding Municipalities namely; L.B. Nagar, Rajendranagar, Kukatpally, Qutubullapur and Kapra Municipalities. The extent of the Musi River Conservation Project sewerage project area 363.43 km2. Current wastewater generated within the proposed sewerage project area is 644.2 MLD. Project involves up-grading/construction of 5 Sewage Treatment Plants (STP) at Jiaguda, Nandi Musaliaguda, Amberpet, Nagole and Nallah Cheruvu. Design treatment capacities are given in Table 4. Table 4. Design treatment capacities of the five Sewage Treatment Plants (STP) covered by the Musi River Conservation Project

Name of STP Treatment Capacity (MLD)

Jiaguda 21

Nandi Musaliaguda 30

Amberpet 339

Nagole 171

Nallah Cheruvu 30

Total 591

The WHO, has ranked the risk of pathogens found in untreated and partially treated wastewater in the following descending order: helminth infections, protozoa/bacteria and viruses with viruses posing almost negligible risk. Helminth infections are mainly due to: Ascaris lumbricoides (roundworm), Trichuris trichiura (whipworm), Ancylostoma duodenale and Nector americanus (hookworms).


22

However, it is important to note that helminth egg levels were not determined as an indicator of water quality during the feasibility study for the Musi River Conservation Project and are not included in the Water Quality Standards for Surface Water Sources (Central Pollution Control Board 2001).

Composite wastewater samples of dry weather flow from all nallahs and the existing Amberpet STP were analyzed following NRCD guidelines and presented in Table 5. However, IWMI water quality monitoring at selected points along the Musi River from 2004-2006 are given in Table 6. With the exception of sampling points at Pillaipally and Battigudem Total (Ascaris, Hookworm and Trichuris) helminth egg counts exceed the WHO guideline value of <1 egg l-1. Disposal Standards for the treatment plants as stipulated by the NRCD are BOD <30 mg l-1, TSS <50 mg l-1 and Fecal Coliforms <10,000 MPN/ 100ml. This complies with the revised WHO guideline value of < 104 (MPN per 100ml) for restricted irrigation in labour intensive agriculture (protective of adults and children < 15yrs). This would be a significant improvement on the current water quality parameters measured by IWMI and NRCD and should have a direct and positive impact on the health of producers, produce quality and hence consumer health risks. Table 5. Composite dry weather flow wastewater quality attributes for selected STPs and nallah’s covered under the Musi River Conservation Project’.

Location Parameters

Flow (MLD) pH

DO (mg l-1)

TDS (mg l-1)

BOD (mg l-1)

COD (mg l-1)

Fecal Coliform MPN / 100 ml 105

Amberpet

Amberpet STP inlet 192.00 7.01 ND 1406 314 602 2.600

Amberpet STP Outlet 7.07 ND 1412 214 458 2.900

Puranapul North 2.50 6.85 ND 1042 191 453 5.625

Puranapul North 12.00 5.98 ND 1186 291 663 5.050

Surplus Nullah 76.00 7.02 ND 1247 246 580 6.700

Afzalsagar nullah 16.00 7.00 ND 1189 180 415 4.700

Patel Nagar nullah 6.00 6.98 ND 984 246 576 6.200

Nagole

Puranapul South 3.00 6.87 ND 1017 151 338 2.950

High Court Nullah 7.00 6.98 ND 1036 198 457 3.575

Muriki Nullah 34.00 6.97 ND 977 240 569 3.725

Nagole Main 8.50 6.95 ND 1073 187 459 4.950

Mansoorabad Main 3.90 7.20 ND 1028 204 499 5.075

SIS Main 42.00 7.30 ND 1224 231 566 4.950

Nallacheruvu

Ramanthapur Nullah 7.00 6.78 ND 1167 303 710 4.325

Peddacheruvu Nullah 12.00 7.12 ND 1431 170 400 2.100

Jiaguda STP ND

Bapughat Nullah 9.00 7.24 ND 1039 159 314 4.975

Mukalla Nullah 5.00 7.00 ND 1240 198 431 6.425

Nandi Muslaiguda

Bahadurpura Nullah 21.00 6.80 ND 1195 243 562 4.525

Kishen Bagh 3.00 6.40 ND 1885 282 576 5.875

The risk to producer, consumer and environmental health and the economic tradeoffs and benefits of wastewater activities in selected study sites along the Musi River are currently being investigated by IWMI and collaborating partners. The BMZ funded project entitled “Ensuring Health and Food Safety from Rapidly Expanding Wastewater Irrigation in South Asia” will develop, implement, validate and promote the uptake of a set of risk mitigation options (multi-barrier approaches) based on a comprehensive assessment of risks and benefits associated with wastewater irrigation. These options will be evaluated in the context of WHO and FAO wastewater re-use guidelines.


23

Close collaboration is being established with relevant city partners particularly HMWSSB to ensure input, adoption and institutionalization of project outputs.

Table 6. Water quality attributes at selected sampling points along the Musi River December 2003 – January 2005 (Ensink, 2006). Sampling Location

Distance (km) downstream from

Hyderabada

DO (mg l-1)

BOD5 (mg l-1)

EC dS m-1

Totalb Helminth Egg Count Eggs l-1

E.Colic (CFU 100 ml-1)

Amberpet 0

0.1

(±0.08)

325

(±33.5)

1.52

(±0.055)

58.41

(±13.15)

8.07 x 107

(±4.9 x107)

Nagole 5.2

0.12

(±0.07)

317

(±39.0)

1.84

(±0.085)

53.24

(±12.61)

2.94 x 107

(±1.6 x107)

Peerzadiguda 9.6

0.12

(±0.075)

162

(±24.0)

2.03

(±0.10)

28.47

(±5.20)

3.81 x 107

(±2.7 x107)

Mutialguda 13.9

0.12

(±0.08)

95

(±17.0)

2.00

(±0.10)

10.71

(±4.26)

2.70 x 105

(±1.6 x105)

Gourvelli 17.3

0.23

(±0.125)

73

(±26.5)

1.96

(±0.10)

6.18

(±1.60)

1.53 x 105

(±5.3 x104)

Koremalla 20.0

1.12

(±0.505)

54

(±9.0)

1.98

(±0.105)

1.88

(±2.86)

1.43 x 105

(±6.3 x104)

Pillaipally 27.7

3.03

(±0.675)

31

(±10.0)

1.99

(±0.09)

0.41

(±0.85)

1.22 x 105

(±3.8 x104)

Battigudem 39.7 5.00

(±0.82)

15

(±6.5)

2.26

(±0.175)

0.0

(±0.0)

8.67 x 102

(±2.3 x102) aDistance Measured along the river bed b

Ascaris, Hookworm and Trichuris cSampling undertaken from Jan. – Jul. 2005. All other values represent mean water quality parameters based on bi-weekly sampling undertaken

from December 2003 – January 2005 (Ensink, 2006). Values in parentheses indicate ± 1 STDEV.

5.1.4 Marketing With the exception of the wastewater irrigated leafy vegetables, it is envisaged that the marketing (formal and informal) of agricultural products generated by urban and peri-urban producers will not be problematic given the high demand and the existing and emerging market channels outlined in Section 3.1.

5.2 Conclusions and lessons learned

Rapid urbanization creates tremendous challenges in the provision of infrastructure, employment, environmental management, food security, nutrition and health. Among the many challenges, one of basic and crucial challenge that remains is ensuring food and nutritional security within the urban zone. In this context urban and peri-urban agriculture (UPA) can make significant contributions. However, currently in Hyderabad UPA and consequently, LIPOs fall outside of conventional research, institutional and funding support mechanisms. It is practiced without supporting policies or guidelines by small-and medium scale farmers but contributes to the urban food supply primarily in the form of, green fodder and dairy products (dominated by fresh milk) and increasingly, perishable vegetables. Several key externalities are directly impacting on the long-term sustainability of peri-urban green fodder production and small scale urban dairies in Hyderabad. Escalating land prices in the current green fodder production areas ensure that land is increasingly being purchased for property development. Linked to the escalating land prices and loss of agricultural HUDA and MCH are actively implementing the ‘Musi Beautification Program’ which when completed will encroach on 1,600 acres currently under green fodder production. This is expected to result in a 63% reduction in fodder (Paragrass) entering the green fodder market. Further, a number of Acts enforced by MCH and issued as public notifications by the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad are restricting small scale


24

urban milk producers. A further externality influencing the long-term stability of urban ‘fresh milk’ production systems is the Government Policy to promote the ‘branding’ of milk and processing/treatment prior to retail as a means of ensuring milk quality and public health. This is

supported by the Prevention of Food Adulteration (PFA) Rules (1995). With regards supportive policies, there are two key State policies indirectly supporting the formation of LIPOs namely the AP Mutually Aided Cooperative Societies Act (1995) and the Companies (Amendment) Act, 2002. In Hyderabad it is now mandatory for all new constructions to have a rainwater harvesting structure either in the form of groundwater re-charge or water conservation. In addition, HMWSSB in association with the National River Conservation Directorate (NRCD) is undertaking the ‘Musi River Conservation Project’. Both these initiatives are managed by HMWSSB and will directly address a key constraint to the development of UPA in Hyderabad namely, water. Access to credit and markets for UPA products is not seen as a constraint to UPA in Hyderabad. The key constraints are listed in Section 5.1. These are currently being addressed by IWMI and project partners through the RUAF-CFF Project and the BMZ funded project entitled “Ensuring Health and Food Safety from Rapidly Expanding Wastewater Irrigation in South Asia”. A key lessoned learned in undertaking this report which reiterates the findings of the aforementioned projects is that a multi-stakeholder and multi-disciplinary approach which has strong institutional as well as ground roots support is essential if suitable and equitable policies are to be developed that facilitate the inclusion of UPA in long-term city planning. This must be coupled with effective knowledge management and awareness programs that highlight the benefits of UPA as well as any risk mitigation options (where urban solid waste or treated wastewater are utilized) that are required to ensure the production and marketing of ‘safe’ and nutritious food for rapidly expanding cities.

Finally, capacity building at multiple levels (policy, enablers and implementers) is critical if UPA activities are to be productive, sustainable and adoptable.

5.3 Recommendations Through the RUAF-CFF Project and it is strongly recommended that;

• A strong advocacy and awareness program is continued amongst civil society institutions, NGOs, Government Departments and the private sector on the potential benefits of UPA.

• A suitable and equitable environment in created that will facilitate (through a multi-stakeholder action orientated process) the development of supporting policies.

• An institutional home is found for UPA (It is envisaged that this will be the DOH). Negotiations

have already been initiated with the DOH.

• Intense competition for available water resources. Rainwater harvesting and the use of treated

wastewater in associated with appropriate multi-barrier risk mitigation options is being promoted

• A centralized source of essential resources for UPA namely; seed, fertilizer, growth medium, tools, no space/low space technologies etc. is established.

• Capacity of various stakeholders (particularly DOH) in UPA and allied activities continues to be undertaken through ‘Training of Trainer’ initiatives.

• Appropriate targeted training and knowledge materials are developed

• Bright Spot examples are developed to demonstrate the potential of UPA in Hyderabad. Currently,

a school garden and terrace garden/household waste separation and composting activity in a

organized colony (8th Battalion Special Police) are planned.

The Musi River Conservation Project project document clearly states that the “treated sewage from

Amberpet and Nallahceruvu STPs (369 MLD) will be discharged into the existing irrigation channels

to support the current agricultural activities”. This is a clear indication of institutional support in terms of providing water quantity and improved water quality for fodder, vegetable and rice producers along the Musi River.


25

As stated above, IWMI and collaborating partners will develop, implement, validate and promote the uptake of a set of risk mitigation options (multi-barrier approaches) based on a comprehensive assessment of risks and benefits associated with treated wastewater irrigation. Close collaboration is

being established with relevant city partners particularly HMWSSB to ensure input, adoption and institutionalization of project outputs. It is strongly recommended therefore that vegetable, fodder and rice producers along the Musi River form producer organizations. It is envisaged that the formation of such cooperative structures under the AP Mutually Aided Coop Society Act (1995) and the Companies (Amendment) Act, 2002 (Annex 9 and 10) will safeguard their current livelihoods and form a strong basis for direct dialogue with the HMWSSB and other line agencies. The formation of such producer organizations will also strengthen their lobbying power for services from government line agencies. Currently, the existing green fodder and urban dairy system particularly small urban producers is economically viable and provides an integrated service e.g. procuring inputs, production and marketing. Inputs are cheap and currently available at the green fodder market. The urban dairy producers are operating in a high margin market as transport costs (and labour costs) are minimal due to close proximity of consumers and the fodder market. Consequently, infrastructural bottle necks are minimal. No reason economically to form a cooperative of ‘urban’ dairy producers to reduce production, operating and marketing costs. In addition, the current legal constraints discussed in detail in Section 3.2 would prevent ‘un-licensed’ urban dairy producers from highlighting their existence let alone forming a registered organization. However, with the increasing pressure on the land available for green fodder (paragrass) production it is recommended that urban milk producers for a organizational structure to assist the ‘Green Fodder Association’ in lobbying for the protection of the existing fodder production area. Further it is recommended that the ‘Green Fodder Association’ and the urban dairy farmers and commercial dairy units partner with consumers buying fresh milk to facilitate official recognition of their trade and assure safety standards in all aspects of the production and consumption chain.

hyderabad revised case study - fao - idrc - project … · of this project report. ... the andhra...

Documents